The recent appearance of the much anticipated Oxford guide to the historical reception of Augustine testifies to a new-found interest in Augustine's Nachleben. The volume under review is a solid part of this trend as it offers a panoramic view of the reception of Augustine's struggle against Pelagianism. While the majority of the thirteen essays in this collection focus on the late antique reception of the Pelagian controversy in Gaul, there are occasional excursions to other regions and times.

The volume provides elements which help it to function as a stand-alone for the reader interested in Augustine's and Pelagius' debate and its afterlife, such as a discussion of the term ‘semi-Pelagian’ and of the delineation of the semi-Pelagian controversy, part of a lucid introduction to the collection by Rebecca Harden Weaver, as well as a short chronological overview of key events discussed in the articles. However, a highly useful addition toward this aim would have been a general bibliography, bringing together the references for which one must now scavenge in the footnotes.

The first essay in the collection, by Eugene TeSelle, outlines the controversy's origins with Augustine and Pelagius. He reminds us of the key elements necessary for understanding the development of the Pelagian controversy, distinguishing between the thread of the controversy associated with Caelestius and that associated with Pelagius, and pointing to the evolving and complex nature of Augustine's views on grace as the basis for subsequent controversies. Roland Teske then moves us to Gaul, where Augustine's critics faced off against Prosper of Aquitaine on the subject of the interpretation of I Timothy ii. 4. Teske concludes that Augustine's response in the form of De praedestinatione sanctorum and De dono perseuerantiae, relying on rumours, was ill-advised and that the debate might have been more easily resolved if he had looked at his adversaries' texts. Alexander Hwang investigates the impact of Augustine's responses to the Gallic question on the evolving views of his supporters, in particular Prosper, supporters who came to realise that Augustine's doctrine of grace and their own understanding were not entirely reconcilable. Raúl Villegas Marín finds in his contribution that the Carmen de prouidentia Dei, traditionally attributed to Prosper, was definitely not authored by him. In fact, Prosper discredited the piece using his Carmen de ingratis. The latter text is also the subject of Jérémy Delmulle's excellent essay. He offers a close reading of the poem and concludes that the genre of the didactic poem allowed Prosper to present his views and those of his opponents in a way that invited communication. The final article centred on Prosper is by Thomas Humphries. He focuses on Prosper's pneumatology, using the Letter to Rufinus and Against the Conferencer as an indicator of the evolution of his view on Augustine's theology of grace and free will through his deepening understanding of Augustine. Boniface Ramsey then offers the first essay on the doctores gallicani, specifically on Cassian's Conference 13 and how it reflects the influence of Augustine on Cassian's writing, particularly in a negative sense, in that Augustine's extreme views on grace may have unbalanced Cassian's own more moderate interpretations. Augustine Casiday proposes that the views of the doctores gallicani cannot be divided into an Augustinian and a Pelagian camp. He gives the example of Vincent of Lérins and links his more nuanced interpretation of Vincent's anti-Augustinianism to the question of the authorship of the Objections. Francis X. Gumerlock's contribution, ‘Fulgentius of Ruspe on the saving will of God’, looks at the issue of grace, free will and predestination in a different region, North Africa, in the early sixth century and focuses on the impact of training as a classical rhetorician on Fulgentius' interpretation of I Tim. ii. 4. Matthew J. Pereira goes back to the doctores gallicani with Faustus of Riez, in many ways the most representative of the group. Pereira looks at Faustus' role as delegate to the Council of Arles in 473 and how he addressed existing tensions in his On grace, which was received in later times as a text supporting Pelagius. Ralph Mathisen's contribution focuses on Caesarius of Arles and the Second Council of Orange. He takes a closer look at the person of Caesarius and the context and genesis of the council and asks whether our current-day interpretation does not present it as more influential than it actually was. With Brian Matz's contribution, we leap forward three centuries to the Carolingian era, when the debate on grace and predestination flared up again with the controversy surrounding Gottschalck of Orbais's defence of double predestination. Matz emphasises the role of the Council of Orange, which, while seemingly unknown in the first stage of the controversy, was the subject of fierce debate on the correct interpretation of the council's conclusions during the second stage. The final chapter moves us East, to Theodore of Mopsuestia's Against the defenders of original sin. Nestor Kavvadas studies this, ‘the only Greek work to directly address the issues of the Pelagian controversy’, and finds typical Western topics in it, though handled in a way distinctive of both in relation to Western and Eastern concerns.

The general conclusion of the volume is that the complexity of the reception of Augustine's theology of grace is greater than it may seem at first glance. The participants in the debates cannot be divided into clear-cut ‘for and against Augustine’ categories. Their views must be nuanced and the evolution thereof taken into account, while modern scholarship must recognise, but can also appreciate, the ‘sheer messiness of the late antique reception of Augustine's teaching on grace’.